Philadelphia Phillies Starting Rotation: Should Worley and Kendrick Get Spots?
Len Redkoles/Getty Images
With Roy Oswalt and Joe Blanton out, the Philadelphia Phillies have to use backup pitchers for the spots of fourth and fifth starters. Vance Worley and Kyle Kendrick are two options to finish the rotation. The big question is, are they good enough to consistently perform well?
Vance Worley has seemed to almost get a definite reaction from fans: yes. He is 3-1 with a 2.51 ERA for the year. The only thing that worries me is his lack of experience. This is his first full season, and he may not be as consistent as Oswalt was.
I do think, however, that Worley is good enough for the spot of fourth starter until Oswalt comes back.
Let's back up a bit to past years to answer the question of Kyle Kendrick. He has been a starting pitcher since 2007; he pitched twenty games that year and had a 3.87 ERA. In 2008, he started 30 games, finishing with a 5.49 ERA. Since then he has had season ERAs of 3.42, 4.72 and this year's 3.23.
Some of his years look good; others don't look as great. Kyle Kendrick looks to have improved and his ERA is fine for a fifth starter—until Blanton comes back— but his performance may not be just like his statistics describe.
He is a very inconsistent pitcher—he has been for most of his career. If he does become the temporary fifth starter, will he be able to consistently hold the opponents to below four runs?
I think that he is a developing pitcher, and this will be a great chance to show everyone that he really is good enough to be a starter. There is some talk about not having Joe Blanton return to the team. If Kendrick performs well enough, he may get a permanent spot or share it with Vance Worley.
Worley seems good enough to be a consistent pitcher. Kyle Kendrick has been inconsistent, but I believe that given the chance he can show everyone how much potential he has. He has improved a lot, and I know that he will come through soon enough.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?